Detroit Free Press Education Writer

Oakland University fired Beckie Francis as the women’s basketball coach because she was mentally and emotionally abusing her players, was “obsessed” with the players’ eating habits and body fat and refused to follow orders to separate her religion from her coaching, the school said in a new court filing.

It’s the first time the university publicly acknowledged the reasons behind Francis’ June firing, although the Free Press reported in July the move came after players complained they were being emotionally and mentally abused by the coach. Francis has said in previous court filings she doesn’t know why she was fired.

The two sides will be in court Wednesday morning to argue a motion filed by Francis last week to obtain an unredacted copy of the internal investigation report that led to her firing. The university has provided Francis with a heavily redacted version of that report.

“(Francis’) desperation is feigned,” OU said in a Friday court filing, given to the Free Press on Monday morning by the university. “(Francis) participated in two meetings totaling more than two hours where Oakland explained to her why it was suspending her, listened to her responses and explanations, and then terminated her employment.

“After the meeting where Oakland suspended her, (Francis) even sent a several page rebuttal to the reasons given for her suspension and review, which were duly considered along with her responses and explanations.”

Francis has not commented publicly on the allegations made by players.

However, in an e-mail sent at 9:27 p.m. on May 30 to OU general counsel Victor Zambardi, Francis defended herself, calling it a witch hunt. OU included a redacted version in its most recent court filing.

“I have no written nutrition policy — my staff and I encourage healthy eating practices,” she said, adding she is anti-candy because it “produces severe sugar crashes and can impact performance.

“Our training table is not restricted — buffet style at high end hotels.

“I am aware of the rates of eating disorders for females, in particular for female athletes, it is a national problem. If there was ever an issue with the team’s eating practices, I wish the players would have come to me. No player in the history of the program has ever brought this up as a problem directly to me.

“I feel this is a witch hunt. ... I have high standards and expectations, not all student-athletes can perform to these standards...

(Page 3 of 3)

“I was shocked with accusations. We supply so much food at our training tables and on the road when playing away games it is almost a ridiculous claim.”

But OU found the claims were correct and that’s why they fired her, the university said in the filing.

OU, in its court filing, quoted an internal report on the situation as saying: “All interviewees/witnesses ... categorize the allegations as forms of mental and emotional abuse. (Francis) expects automatic compliance with her instructions and/or expectations; ... insulting and demeaning to assistant coaches ... assumes her priorities/positions are so important that others should defer without question and gets irritated when questioned; any difference of opinion is perceived to be a disagreement, and any disagreement is viewed as proof of disloyalty and disloyalty is not tolerated.

“Obsessed with nutrition and body fat. Francis controls how much they (student athletes) eat, when and what they eat.”

The OU filing says the athletic director told Francis to stop her religious discrimination and “pray to play” but that continued after the warning.

At the court hearing Wednesday, Francis is asking a judge to order OU to release the full internal investigation report. OU said in its court filing that it redacted the report to protect the privacy of students and for other legal reasons.

Francis’ attorney, Deborah Gordon, told the Free Press that OU’s response misses the point of what Francis is asking for.

“Whether she was told or knew something is not remotely the point of what I am requesting,” Gordon said in an e-mail to the Free Press. “First, we don’t agree that they gave her any specifics.

“Second, so what if they did ‘tell’ her? That has zero to do with employee obtaining a copy of her record, including what the employer relied on for terminating her, per Michigan law.

“They choose to do an investigation, create a written report and thrown vague allegations around in public, so it is what it is. She needs to know what is in that report, not what they say or supposedly told her.”